Subject: Confusing content with topic. I totally agree!
History does NOT change!

I cannot agree more with you regarding this fact: When it comes
to Holy Bible vs Quran, they're indeed both talking about God and
how he should be worshiped, but they have many gigantic differences
in contents.

And should anyone argue that God's laws could have changed by
the time of Mohammed and that's why Quranic laws are different from
Biblical laws, I say this: History DOES NOT change! There's no
better way than listing the differences in historical facts of the
Bible and that of the Koran. One simple example is the vastly
different stories of many prophets. I list below some sharp
discrepancies in these stories:

According to the Bible: Jacob tricked his father Isaac to become
prophet! David is an adulterer and a murderer! His son Solomon is
even worse, he became an idols worshipper! Lut impregnated his two
daughters! Aaron is the one who built the Golden Calf! Etc, etc.
These most hideous crimes, just to list a few, are committed by
people who God has chosen to become his prophets!

So it appears that according to the Bible God either didn't know
these people would commit such crimes or He knew and yet chose them
still to guide us to Him!!! This is so much in contrast to the so
un-sophisticated version found in the Koran. Believe it or not,
Muslims are naive enough to believe that God protects His prophets
from sinning! That He guides them all the time!!! That just does
not make any sense at all! And this is no where near the
sophistication/twists/ironies found in the so "un-corrupted"
Bible.....

Peace!

Our answer:

Dear ----,

Thank you for your e-mail.

You are correct when you say that the Bible and the Quran
contain significantly different content. You are also correct when
you say that history cannot be changed - although many have
attempted to change it.

I agree with you that it would be possible for God to adjust
some of His rules for mankind either due to a "progressive
revelation" - whereby He was gradually introducing mankind to a
"final revelation" - or simply due to various changes in the
world.

The litmus test for the "final" revelation however, is whether
or not it maintains any correlation and continuity with the
previous revelations. Herein lays one of Islam's most obvious
glaring problems. For instance, Islam claims that:

There is a clear continuity between the Bible and the Quran and
the religious practices of those worshippers described in each
book.

Yet, Muslims also claim that the majority of the proof for this
continuity has been destroyed or corrupted, or they themselves are
often found denying or trying to destroy any evidence to the
contrary.

The significance of this problem in the case for Islam is massive.
Anyone who actually thinks through these issues will see that
Islam's story - its view of history and its worldview - simply do
not make any sense. For example:

Archeology on numerous levels demonstrates undeniably that the
Jews worshipped God primarily through the detailed rituals and
sacrifices that were offered at the temple that sat on Mt. Moriah
in Jerusalem for over a thousand years. On the other hand, many
Muslims seem to deny that Mt. Moriah was ever even the location of
the Jewish Temple. Consider the official Palestinian Ministry of
Information's statement that "there is no tangible evidence of any
Jewish traces/remains in the old city of Jerusalem and its
immediate vicinity." Or the declaration of Palestinian Authority
Mufti 'Ikrima Sabri, in an interview with the Germany periodical
Die Welt, that "there is not [even] the smallest indication of the
existence of a Jewish temple on [the Temple Mount] in the past." -
Middle East Media Research Institute.

Such denials even go to the point where many important
historical artifacts are continually being destroyed by the Waqf -
the Muslim Temple Mount Authority in order to attempt to "change"
or hide history:

Why is this re-writing, or should we say erasing of History so
important in this discussion? Because, while it is easy to
demonstrate the clear continuity between the Jewish rituals,
practices and beliefs and Christian practice and belief, there is
no reasonable explanation from the Muslim perspective regarding how
the complex system of Jewish sacrifices at the Jewish temple have
any continuity to Muslim religious practices.

This Muslim denial includes a denial of the Jewish Scriptures
which prophesy -- in multiple places, and in many specific details
-- the coming of the Messiah, who would, among other things,
institute a "New Covenant" through His death burial and resurrection.

For example: Isaiah the prophet prophesied this:

"He was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our
infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken
by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our
transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment
that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.
We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all."
Isaiah 53:3-6

Muslims deny these very Scriptures (which prophesy of the
suffering of the Messiah) by claiming that they have been
"corrupted" by the Jews. But how? Why? Muslims are simply not able
to explain why in the world the Jews (who deny that Jesus was even
the Messiah) would "corrupt" their own Scriptures by adding such
clear foretellings of the crucifixion of Jesus. The Muslim position
simply does not make sense.

Muslims also cannot explain the reason, for instance, why God
would have commanded the Jews to celebrate the "Passover" feast -
sacrificing a "spotless, blemish-free lamb" in order that its blood
would be wiped on the door posts of the Hebrew people, thus
effectively causing the angel of death to "pass over" these
particular houses. Instead of even trying to explain what were
God's reasons for commanding this, Muslims will usually either deny
that this ever happened (yet will never give a single reason why
anyone would simply make-up such a thing) or simply shrug their
shoulders and admit that they have no idea what this was all about.
Once again, the Islamic position doesn't make sense.

True Christians however understand this clearly as a prophetic
foreshadowing (an essential aspect of any "progressive revelation")
of the "final" revelation - which of course was the eventual
crucifixion, death and resurrection of the Messiah for sins, in
order that whosoever has applied the blood of Jesus to their hearts
(spiritually, by believing God's message) will be passed over on
the Final Judgment, that is, spared eternal death.

This leads us to another very obvious example of historical
revisionism on behalf of Islam: The denial of the crucifixion,
death and resurrection of the Messiah.

Despite the enormous amount of evidence to the effect that Jesus
was indeed a historical figure who was crucified, thus fulfilling
scores of Old Testament prophecies and symbols, without one small
speck of solid support - simply because the Quran says so - Muslims
deny the single most important and central event in the history of
God's dealings with mankind: the substitutionary death and
resurrection of Jesus the Messiah.

While on the subject of the Messiah's death on a Roman cross,
let me ask you, which Islamic "theory" do you personally hold to
regarding Jesus' crucifixion? You do realize that there are several
different theories, don't you? If you claim to believe in one
story, there are lengthy arguments from classical Muslim scholars
which will disagree with your version of the story. Was Jesus
replaced by one of his disciples? Or was it Simon the Cyrene? Was
it Judas? Or was it that no one was crucified at all? Or was it
that Jesus was the one crucified but was revived later? These are a
few of the different theories offered by Muslim scholars. While
Muslims are consistent in their denial of this event, they cannot
even agree as to what really happened on that day. For truly, it is
"only conjecture that they follow." Ironic isn't it?

I would very seriously encourage you to purchase and read a book
called, The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. If you are not
able to do so, I would be happy to buy one for you and send it to
you.

While there are numerous evidences to support the historicity of
the resurrection, one of the simpler reasons to believe in this
event is because the disciples who followed Jesus - the
eyewitnesses - obviously believed it. This is clearly demonstrated
by the fact that every one of Jesus' disciples - except possibly
John - dedicated and eventually gave their very lives as martyrs
while preaching the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus (the
Gospel message). So ----, let me ask you, why would the disciples
give their lives for a lie? Unless they were 100% sure of the fact
that Jesus was crucified and resurrected, why would they dedicate
the remainder of their lives preaching such a lie? Muslims deny
that the crucifixion and resurrection, but they are unable to
answer some of the basic questions that explain why the disciples
would have lived this way to preach that it happened. The only
explanation that I have heard yet from a Muslim is that God tricked
or deceived the disciples and allowed them to preach a total and
complete lie. Talk about not making any sense! Either Jesus'
disciples proclaimed the truth, or Jesus was the biggest failure of
all of the prophets. For if Jesus' message never even got past his
immediate twelve disciples, and when He left, they were all
deceived, then indeed, Jesus was the greatest failure of all
prophets. Yet even Islam claims that Jesus is second only to
Muhammad in terms of the greatest prophets. Again, the Islamic
worldview, when compared to the simple facts of History, simply
does not make sense. Not for the person who actually thinks through
any of the issues. Jesus - the historical facts surrounding His
life and the life of His disciples - is the thorn in the side of
Islam, not its vindicator as we would expect if indeed Islam was
only a continuation of the religion which Jesus preached.

Another clear problem for Islam is the endless accusation that
the Bible as a whole was corrupted. Muslims are quick to declare
that the Bible is corrupt yet they are simply unable to explain
when, where or how this occurred. Was the Bible corrupted prior to
Muhammad? If so, then why did Muhammd make comments urging
Christians and Jews to consult their own books to see if indeed
Muhammad was a true prophet or not? For instance:

"Let the People of the Gospel judge by that which Allah hath
revealed therein. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath
revealed: such are evil-livers." Surah 5:47

So should we consult our Scriptures or not? If they are corrupt
then why would Allah ask us to consult corrupted Scriptures? Again,
it just doesn't make sense.

Some suggest that the Bible was corrupted prior to Muhammad.
Yet, even the Quran shows that at least the Torah was still around
and uncorrupt at the time of Jesus. The Quran says clearly that God
taught Jesus the Torah:

"And God will teach him (Jesus) the Scripture and wisdom, and
the Torah and the Gospel" Surah 3:48

So if Jesus was taught the Torah by God, it could not have been
corrupt prior to Jesus' day. For if it had, then certainly Jesus
would have attempted to correct the corrupt Torahs that existed in
his day. Surely Jesus would have taught the correct Torah to His
disciples. Yet what do we find? We find instead that Jesus'
disciples - and their disciples (the Church Fathers) used the very
same Torah as the Jews of their day. Or did Allah teach Jesus a
corrupt Torah? That certainly wouldn't make any sense either.
Clearly, the Torah was still intact in the days of Jesus.

But here's the problem for the Islamic position. Here is where
the facts are again a problem for Islam. The Torah that we posses
today is the exact same as the Torahs of Jesus' day. In fact, it is
based on manuscripts that existed nearly two hundred years before
the birth of Jesus. The Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls clearly
predate Jesus' era. So on one hand, the Quran confirms that the
Torah was alive and uncorrupted in Jesus' day and on the other
hand, you have Jews and Christians reading the very same Torah
today. But because this Torah does not correlate to the teachings
of the Quran (despite the complete logical inconsistency here),
Muslims are forced to claim that the Torah is corrupt. Once again,
it simply doesn't make sense!

The list of problems with the Islamic worldview simply roll on
and on and on. Islam cannot be reconciled to the clear facts of
History.

And yet despite the facts, you seem to see it the other way.
Perhaps this is because of the way that you were raised. Perhaps
you have never explored some of the issues that I have raised. You
point out that the Bible claims that the former "prophets" of the
Bible were not perfect men. The Bible actually contains stories of
them committing sins. Yet you say that this impossible. God must
have protected them from sinning. Again, let me ask you ----, did
God give them the freedom of choice? Or were they incapable of sin?
Did they even possess free will? Again, this is another clear
reason why Islam does not make sense. In fact, the Quran even makes
it clear that Muhammad himself sinned:

Surah 48:2 says: "That Allah may forgive thee of thy sin that
which is past and that which is to come, and may perfect His favor
unto thee, and may guide thee on a right path."

"So forgive the sins which I have done in the past
or will do in the future, and also those (sins) which I did in
secret or in public, and that which You know better than I. None
has the right to be worshipped but you". (Hadith al-Bukhari, Vol.
9, p. 403)

Clearly, not only did Muhammad sin in the past, both he and God
knew that he would sin in the future. If Muhammad - supposedly the
greatest of all prophets - sinned, then why is it strange that
other great men of the Bible also had shortcomings? The Biblical
stories are far more realistic and encouraging than the Islamic
dogma. It says to me that God can - and does - use weak men who
nevertheless have a clear "yes" in their hearts toward God.

----, I thank you again for your e-mail. I hope that our
discussion has at least been slightly enlightening to you. I pray
that you will at least consider some of the things that I have
discussed and some of the questions that I have posed to you. I
pray that someday soon, you will find the truth. Until then, I
encourage you to pray earnestly that God would open your eyes to
the truth. I also encourage you to download and read a free book
which explains the consistent message of all of God's prophets down
through history as to how a man might be righteous before God:

This book will give you the Bible's answers to many more basic
questions. Be sure to read the whole book since it shows how all
the basic teachings of Scripture fit together like pieces to a
puzzle.

Bless You!

Lazarus

Webeditor's note: Regarding the "sins of the prophets" ... just one question as food
for thought: Is it really a credible hypothesis to claim that the Bible invented these sins
to wrongly accuse the prophets, or could it be that the Quran/Islam is trying to cover up
the sins of the prophets to make them appear sinless? Could it not be that the Bible is
simply a very honest book, a book of truth, even though uncomfortable truth at times? Are we
not seeing this same dynamic in operation regarding the life
and deeds of Muhammad? Even though his sins and atrocities are documented clearly in
the Muslim sources, many Muslims try to deny them and cover them up.